On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Roger Clarke <[email protected]>wrote:
> >(2) The actual level of successful hacking is passably low > > I think that factor needs re-phrasing, e.g.: > > (2) The level of successful hacking that costs banks serious money > or material reputational harm is sufficiently low. > Rephrase it however you want, it's wrong. Whilst it's true that some banks have relatively low losses, many do have very real losses. I was talking to one particular bank recently who was losing over a million dollars a week due to Internet Banking fraud. This certainly puts them at the high end of the scale, but they certainly aren't unique. >From what I've heard the Australian banks have less of a problem than those in many other countries, but it's only a matter of time. The challenge for the banks is exactly what's being discussed - how to balance the impact to the user of additional security, v's the cost of the fraud occurring. There are numerous products that banks use to attempt to detect/block fraudulent logins and transactions - many of which are either somewhat or even completely transparent to the end user - but at the end of the day no product works perfectly. Scott _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
